PER CURIAM: Charlie
Anderson, Jr. was serving a probationary sentence for armed robbery. While on
probation, Anderson tested positive for drugs, failed to notify his probation
agent of subsequent arrests, and failed to pay fees. The trial court revoked
his probation in full. Anderson appeals the revocation of his probation,
arguing the trial court erred by not making any evidentiary findings to support
its decision. We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR,
and the following authorities: State
v. Shumate, 276 S.C. 46, 47, 275
S.E.2d 288, 288 (1981) ("A defendant's
failure to timely object to or seek modification of his sentence in the trial
court precludes him from presenting his objection for the first time on appeal."); State v. Hamilton, 333 S.C. 642, 647, 511 S.E.2d 94, 96 (Ct. App. 1999)
(holding the trial court has discretion to revoke probation, and the appellate
court can only review for errors of the law "unless the lack of legal or
evidentiary basis indicates the circuit judge's decision was arbitrary and
capricious").

AFFIRMED.

Williams, pieper, and
lockemy, JJ., concur.

[1] We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to
Rule 215, SCACR.